Hurricane Katrina:Perceptions of Older People in a Community Accepting

Displaced VictimsYoshinori Kamo, Tammy L. Henderson, &

Karen A. RobertoThe Annual Meeting of the Gerontological Society of

AmericaNov. 22, 2010, New Orleans, LA

Major Issues• Katrina landfall in August 29, 2005.• Baton Rouge (70 mi NW): a premiere destination for

displaced persons from New Orleans to flee.• Changes in perceptions of older people in the

receiving community.• Are they justified by demographic data?• Changes in the attitudes of older people toward

newcomers.• Did it change the community itself?• What determines the perceptions and attitudes?• Policy implications

Table 1. Characteristics of the Sample (N=85)

Mean S.D.Female .89 .31Black .72 .45Age 71.86 8.41Education 12.46 3.33Married .29 .46Income 17.59 11.97Health 3.07 1.15

Mean S.D.Disorder (T2) 3.78 1.10Crowding (T2) 3.79 .96

Disorder (T1) 3.99 1.05Crowding (T1) 3.99 .90

Acceptance 3.63 .93Disapproval 3.23 1.08

Table 2. Perception of Change Before Katrina

(Time 1) & immediately after (Time 2)

NOTE: Scores indicate “1=none” to “5=a great deal.”*** p<.001, ** p<.01, * p<.05, # p<.10 (or p<.05, one-tailed)

Items T1 T2 Diff. N

Your neighborhood 3.10 2.89 .23 85

Baton Rouge, in general 4.45 4.16 .26* 84

Traffic 4.69 4.47 .23* 87

# people in grocery stores, restaurants, etc.

4.64 4.08 .56*** 85

# people in public places, such as parks

3.77 3.64 .14 62

Access to facilities such as gyms/recreation centers

3.79 3.43 .37* 66

NOTE: Scores indicate “1=none” to “5=a great deal.”*** p<.001, ** p<.01, * p<.05, # p<.10 (or p<.05, one-tailed)

Items T1 T2 Diff. N

Litter, trash, & clutter 3.95 3.41 .55** 85

Security in stores 4.12 3.67 .46** 80

Visibility of police on the highways, neighborhoods, etc.

3.65 3.40 .25# 79

Violent crimes 3.80 3.98 -.12 77

Crimes such as theft & vandalism 3.88 3.88 .03 79

Items T1 T2 Diff. N

Drug trafficking 3.91 4.08 -.19 57

Gang activity 3.31 3.51 -.19 52

Rent, housing prices 4.22 4.40 -.20 75

Wait time for doctor dentist, etc. 3.11 3.04 .08 79

Wait time for auto/house hold repair services 3.57 3.33 .23 73

Mail service 3.24 2.74 .49** 84

NOTE: Scores indicate “1=none” to “5=a great deal.”*** p<.001, ** p<.01, * p<.05, # p<.10 (or p<.05, one-tailed)

Items T1 T2 Diff. N

Cell phone service 3.19 2.26 .95*** 56

Insurance premiums 2.96 3.29 -.38* 70

Difficulty in getting homeowner’s insurnc. 2.18 2.23 -.05 60

Wait time to S.S, Medicare, etc. 2.48 2.31 .15 60

Other 1.46 1.42 .07 67

NOTE: Scores indicate “1=none” to “5=a great deal.”*** p<.001, ** p<.01, * p<.05, # p<.10 (or p<.05, one-tailed)

Figure 1. Total Population Change in the New Orleans

and Baton Rouge Metropolitan Areas

Source: US Census Bureau (2010)

Figure 2. Changes in Crimes in Baton Rouge

Sources: Federal Bureau of Investigation (2010), Baton Rouge Police Department (2010). NOTE: The number of each crime was converted to its ratio to the 2005 figure in respective crime.

Table 3. Perception of Other People Since

Hurricane Katrina (N=88)

NOTES: Scores indicate “1=a lot less” to “5=a lot more.”*** p<.001, ** p<.01, * p<.05, # p<.10 (or p<.05, one-tailed), for the difference between the mean value and 3.0.

Since Katrina, I am: Mean

Suspicious of others 3.40**

Trusting of others 2.86

Reserved with others 3.08

Tolerant of others 3.38**

Fearful of others 3.25#

Patient with others 3.69***

Frustrated with others 3.02

Friendly to others 3.81***

Table 4. Estimated Regression Equations for

Older Residents’ Perceptions of Changes in

Baton Rouge

NOTE: * p<.05, # p<.10 (or p<.05, one-tailed)

Dep. Variables

Social Disorder (N=85) Crowding (N=85)

Change between before

Katrina &

Weeks following

HKNow

Weeks following

HKNow

Predictors b Beta b Beta b Beta b Beta

Female-.16

4-.04

8 .216 .061-.07

2-.02

5-.01

2-.00

4African

American .031 .013 .450 .185 .066 .033.520

# .245

Age-.00

6-.04

6 .002 .012-.00

8-.07

8 .000-.00

5

Dep. Variables

Social Disorder (N=85) Crowding (N=85)

Education -.00

7-.02

2 .043 .129-.04

8-.17

5 .036 .123

Married .323 .141 .241 .100 .191 .097 .293 .140

Income -.017

-.188

-.032*

-.343

.000 .001 -.014

-.174

Health -.270*

-.294

-.166

-.173

-.137

-.174

-.186#

-.222

Constant5.63

93.61

25.56

83.75

2R2 .138 .224 .079 .150

NOTE: * p<.05, # p<.10 (or p<.05, one-tailed)

Table 5. Estimated Regression Equations for

Older Residents’ Acceptance and Disapproval of

Newcomers

Dep. Variables

Acceptance (N=85) Disapproval (N=85)

Predictors b Beta b Beta b Beta b Beta

Female.754

* .252.720

* .240-.67

6-.19

3-.739#

-.211

African American

.149 .073 .039 .019 .637*

.266 .488 .204

Age -.015

-.132

-.015

-.133

.023 .177 .022 .174

Education -.001

-.004

-.010

-.038

-.008

-.024

-.022

-.067

Married .108 .053 .048 .024 -.060

-.026

-.141

-.060

NOTE: * p<.05, # p<.10 (or p<.05, one-tailed)

Income-.01

7-.21

6-.01

1-.13

7 .008 .091 .018 .198

Health .110 .136 .150 .185-.15

0-.15

9-.09

5-.10

1

Disorder .162 .193.293

# .298

Crowding .070 .073 .033 .029

Constant3.82

72.97

82.16

9 .988

R2 .119 .167 .118 .197

NOTE: * p<.05, # p<.10 (or p<.05, one-tailed)